mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Adaptive and Robust Cost-Aware Proof of Quality for Decentralized LLM Inference Networks

arXiv 2601.21189 ↗First posted 29 Jan 2026cs.CR cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Decentralized large language model inference networks require lightweight mechanisms to reward high quality outputs under heterogeneous latency and cost. Proof of Quality provides scalable verification by sampling evaluator nodes that score candidate outputs, then aggregating their scores into a consensus signal that determines rewards. However, evaluator heterogeneity and malicious score manipulation can distort consensus and inflate payouts, which weakens incentive alignment in open participation settings. This paper extends a cost-aware Proof of Quality mechanism by adding adversary-resilient consensus formation. We study robust aggregation rules, including median and trimmed mean, and an adaptive trust-weighted consensus that updates evaluator weights from deviation signals. Using question answering and summarization workloads with a ground truth proxy for offline analysis, we quantify evaluator reliability and show strong variance across evaluators, including task-dependent misalignment that can invert correlations. We then evaluate robustness under four adversarial strategies, including noise injection, boosting, sabotage, and intermittent manipulation, across a sweep of malicious ratios and evaluator sample sizes. Our results show that robust aggregation improves consensus alignment with the ground truth proxy and reduces sensitivity to noisy and strategic attacks compared with simple averaging. We further characterize the operational trade-off introduced by evaluator sampling, where larger evaluator sets reduce evaluator rewards and increase payoff variance while inference rewards remain relatively stable in our configuration. These findings motivate robust consensus as a default component for cost-aware Proof of Quality and provide practical guidance for selecting evaluator sampling parameters under adversarial risk and resource constraints.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jan 2026.

Builds on

14 of 35 references.

References · 14

  1. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
  2. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
  3. 2019Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learningcited by 3,021
  4. 2015Teaching Machines to Read and Comprehendcited by 1,039
  5. 2018How To Backdoor Federated Learningcited by 745
  6. 2018Byzantine-Robust Distributed Learning: Towards Optimal Statistical Ratescited by 698
  7. 2019Local Model Poisoning Attacks to Byzantine-Robust Federated Learningcited by 479
  8. 2018Analyzing Federated Learning through an Adversarial Lenscited by 346
  9. 2018The Hidden Vulnerability of Distributed Learning in Byzantiumcited by 324
  10. 2024Humans or LLMs as the Judge? A Study on Judgement Biasescited by 314
  11. 2019Mean estimation and regression under heavy-tailed distributions--a surveycited by 133
  12. 2023Are Large Language Models Reliable Judges? A Study on the Factuality Evaluation Capabilities of LLMscited by 23
2 more
  1. 2024Proof of Quality: A Costless Paradigm for Trustless Generative AI Model Inference on Blockchainscited by 7
  2. 2025Design and Evaluation of Cost-Aware PoQ for Decentralized LLM Inferencecited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.